with what is going on based on backs -- facts instead of our opinion. this disaster is not natural. the media starts informing people about modification technology. this disaster is a part of whether modification. everybody has this technology. at first, it was just the u.s. the u.s. was using it on other countries. host: tony, we have about 30 seconds and i want to give michael a chance to address that. guest: i think the caller raises an interesting point because there are policies that go beyond responding to hurricanes. i think these hurricanes are going to be coming so fast and. and hurting the american public in a serious way that the debate about whether there is global warming we can do anything about it is going to be taken off the table, just as the debate about

whether federal funds should be used to bring these people back. the final thing i would say is houston has grown, it is built on wetlands, greenland's, there are no spaces left for this water to run off to. i think a lot of thought has to be given to the way we develop our major urban areas. we cannot concrete over the environment and i think that is going to be a big lesson from this hurricane. host: michael greenberger >> we are going to bring your remarks from texas governor gregg abbott. we are having technical issues so we will continue to monitor the governor's remarks and hurricane harvey recovery efforts and has any information on to you that we get.

we expect to hear more from the white house request for harvey recovery funds from today's white house briefing. spokesman sarah huckabee sanders will take questions. she is scheduled for 3:00 p.m. eastern and we are planning to bring that to you live on c-span. right now until then, a discussion on the vista business surplus military increment to state and local law enforcement officials from this morning's washington journal. . she is the acting director of the criminal justice project at the lawyers' committee for civil rights under law. she is here to discuss president trump's reinstating a policy to allow local police departments to have surplus military equipment. myesha, thank you for joining us. >> thank you for having me. >> let's talk about this department of justice 1033 program that allows for the distribution of surplus military equipment. >> it is a department of defense

program. it is one of several government programs that provide equipment to law enforcement. >> why was it put into place? why did the department decide to get this equipment, free of charge, to local police departments? did not decide, congress decided. has said that the 1033 program does not further its mission. , when rampinged down from actions in the middle east, there was extra equipment, we use do something with it, they decided to pass it on to law enforcement. ledescribed the events that up to the decision in 2014 by the obama administration to take a look at this program and revisit it. >> the obama administration did not look only at the 1033 program.

federaled at all government programs that provide equipment to law enforcement. the obama administration provided more than $82 billion to law enforcement for resources. weref these programs inconsistently applied. they had different rules, different people operating them, and they were communicating. after the events in ferguson, which made everyone concerned with what they saw, the obama administration decided to take a ,ook at what is our footprint what is the federal government's footprint on what is happening? saw number ofe problems across all of the programs. we decided to make sure that the federal government was applying appropriate equipment in a thoughtful manner according to a consistent governmentwide standard.

202-748-88 00. equipment, what type of equipment when we say military increment are we talking about, tanks, high-powered machine guns, what are we talking about exactly? of equipment provided, only 4% or 5% of the

-- law enforcement agencies that were exclusively through k-12

schools. you simply had to state why you needed it and you needed to explain how you would use it and whether or not you had appropriate training or the equipment. that's it. did not deny the equipment. >> what changes now? of whatchange in terms is available and where it can go? it is a wholesale repeal of the obamacare -- of the obama executive order and it's quite thoughtless as demonstrated by the fact that the obama administration spent six months considering the issue before an executive order was issued and another four months considering would be included on which list. a total of 10 months. trump has not even been in office long enough to give the same consideration to this list. wholesale- he simply

repealed the executive order without any consideration, without looking at what was good about it, what was bad about it. it was simply something the obama administration did, so he repealed it and that's dangerous. host: bob is on the line from indiana. hi, bob. caller: thank you for taking my call. when military equipment is given to law enforcement doesn't make it more difficult to determine whether you are under law enforcement? on how lawnding enforcement uses the equipment -- i think that is a concern, and a civilization like the united states where we work

under the role of the constitution, our members of law enforcement are the guardians of those constitutional protections. when they are seen to be treating individuals as if they are enemy combatants instead of constitutional rights, it undermines the legitimacy of law enforcement agencies and makes it more difficult to do their job, makes it more difficult to work with the communities, makes it more difficult to work with the community to solve problems because the community does not trust law enforcement. situation a dangerous . the justice department and those who support this site safety for police as the need to revisit this and it according to the gnu times, in a speech to the fraternal order of police, attorney general jeff sessions

said that president obama made it harder for police to protect themselves. those restrictions went too far. mr. sessions said we will not put superficial concerns above applix safety. what is your response? totally think that's a unfair narrative. the obama administration did not deny anything to law enforcement. they just require them to state why they needed it. much of this equipment is deadly equipment. times thesew york says that local officials have defended it saying it is a way to acquire information that is useful without stretching tight budgets. for example, a harris county received two armored vehicles under the program. one was used for high risk operations and the other for

high water rescue. and the police department cites the search for terrorists like boston marathon bombing? how can they get this out of thisget this program? guest: the problem arises when law-enforcement things i need a tank because the town next door to me has a tank and no officer has training on how to use that these of equipment. first of all, you don't need a somethingnd of all, like a helicopter, something that can be used during hazardous situation, a disaster, if there is a helicopter available within the region, why does every law enforcement agency need its own helicopter? why does a law enforcement agency with no trained pilot

need a helicopter? the obama administration merely said you can have it if you can explain why you needed and if you can prove you are able to use it. that is it. we have a caller from elmore, alabama. yes, ma'am. i want to ask if you have ever worn a badge and then on the street and had these people throwing rocks and bottles at -- an armored car, not a tank. i have never seen a tank in any city in any town, any state in the united states on the streets -- they have issued armored cars, but no tanks. first of all, i was a

federal prosecutor for 13 years. i have been out there with fbi agents and local police officers. i have been out there in kevlar. i know that it is a dangerous situation. i have appreciation for that. i know there are instances where having an armored vehicle, not a tank, can be beneficial. the question is not whether or not the piece of equipment can be useful. the question is whether or not the piece of equipment is appropriate for the law enforcement agency requesting that equipment. host: in an opinion piece in the usa today, a member of the cato institute wrote about his opposition to the reversal of this policy. he said, in 2004 sheriff joe arpaio raided a suburban home looking for illegal firearms. the officers drove an armored vehicle into a parked car, they changed into military style

uniforms, leading a neighbor to think they might've been amateur paintball or's or gang members. one of many teargas canisters fired into the home sparked a fire and set the home ablaze. a dog trying to flee the fire was scared back into the home where it died. these materials can be used in any police operation. guest: that is right, and that is part of the problem. one of the things we considered when developing the obama executive order was the input from local people on the streets. from mayors, from academics, from law enforcement, from military, from government agencies. we were hearing those types of stories. we were hearing stories of law enforcement agencies using this technical equipment to serve search warrants.

they were going into communities where children live, where children were being exposed to violence, not by members of the community about a the law enforcement officers sworn to protect them. that is a situation that creates negative feelings within the community , it undermines the public view of law enforcement. that is what the obama administration and career employees who helped to develop this executive order were thinking of. host: when you say we, you were a former senior policy adviser in the executive office of the president as well as a former legislation and policy counsel at the u.s. department of justice. now an acting director of the criminal justice project at the lawyers' committee for civil rights under law. cheryl is calling in from louisiana. caller: good morning. i would like to say that i agree that the military equipment should be put in the hands of

those that are qualified, trained, like a swat team. not every city should have tanks, heavy equipment and arms. i have seen a tank in a new orleans area being used. i was stunned when i saw that. if someone is unqualified. our military are not the first responders that we have to terrorist attacks, it is those who are the first responders, the police officers. i do believe that every large city that may feel a threat, a terrorist threat, -- that we should have units in

those cities. every little small city and such, your guest has spoken about, no that would be very wasteful. the would not be appropriate in my opinion. host: let's give myesha a chance to respond. guest: you're hitting on something very important. my position at the obama administration was a career federal employee. i was not a political appointee. the way the white house is worked in the past was to bring over career federal employees to supervise subject matter expertise. one of the things we were looking at was that law enforcement officers are called on to do more and more. in order to do more and more they need equipment, they also need better relationships with the community. this executive order was designed to increase the probability that law enforcement and the communities that they serve with see each other as friends and necessary partners, that they would be better able

to work together. that trust increases safety for a law enforcement officer. it does much more than the provision of equipment to ensure that officers are able to come home safe at night. host: there was a report recently about the government accountability office looking into how easy it would be for the department of defense to purchase military equipment. it was a company with a faux website saying it did high-level security and counterterrorism work and an address that led to an empty parking lot." they said they're fake cops received $1.3 million of night vision goggles, simulated rifles, and pipe bomb equipment from the dod 1033 program.

they never did any verification like a visit our location. most of it is what the visibility teams told the marshall project. what is your reaction to how easy it is to get this equipment? it's not selling, it's giving this equipment away. guest: that is one of the things that is so shocking about the trump executive order. that was reported only a month ago. only a month after it is been demonstrated how this equipment is not being properly controlled, the trump administration issues an executive order preventing the controls that are in place to prevent situations like this. it is stunning and careless. it is one of the many troubling things that we've seen coming out of this administration. host: what does the gao recommend, what do you recommend to be the counter of this? guest: i recommend a return to

the obama executive order. they were designed to create and improve relationships between law enforcement and the citizens that they serve. that is one of the things that we are working on at lawyers' committee for civil rights under law. we focus on hate crimes. i and large, people agree that hate crimes are a problem, particularly in this climate. we are working with the international association of chiefs of police to create an advisory committee to bring law enforcement and the community together. to give them the opportunity to work together, improve relationships, and build trust. to demonstrate the law -- to law enforcement community is not against them, and to demonstrate to the community that law enforcement cares and take very seriously their ability to act constitutional rights and to

protect and serve members of the community. host: there is some bipartisan support -- the current stance of the white house. senator rand paul of kentucky wrote an op-ed piece in the new york post where he said that the president's policy was a mistake. he writes "what kind of equipment we talking about? a town of fewer than 65,000, got a nearly to time, mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicle. in a town of less than 30,000, they got an eight ton armored bearcat. over 10,000 bayonets have been handed out." talk about how this is being used. i have not seen a police officer

wielding a bayonet. talk a little bit about that. guest: it is one of the things of the obama administration focused on. it is something that should have happened in the trump administration that did not, that is bringing together all different sides of an argument to devise a joint and common solution. there have been problems with the use of equipment. most law enforcement agencies don't miss use their equipment, but when you are a small law enforcement agency, i think approximately 80% of an -- 87% of all law enforcement agencies have less than -- if you don't have the training to use of equipment, or a budget to maintain this equipment. one of the statement that mayors became to express was that law-enforcement officers could go around the mayor or city officials that were opposed to obtain this equipment. that is why it is necessary to bring everyone to the table. that is why more than 10 months

were spent developing the recommendations, an additional five months were spent making sure there was a for tile soil for implementing the recommendations of the executive order --fertile soil for implementing the recommendations of the executive order. i think that is why you have bipartisan support against this action. host: glenn is calling in from lancaster, california on our public in line. caller: good morning. i would like to talk to myesha, i was wondering if she had anything to do with fast and furious. i know she had something to do with trying to disarm the american public, that is what obama was trying to do his whole career. host: the want to respond to that? guest: i had nothing to do it either. during that time i was in the civil rights division, trying to

prosecute people who violent the -- who violated the civil rights of american citizens. host: justin is calling from maryland. caller: i was curious. obviously your guest is pro-obama and anti-trump. you mentioned earlier that you tried to build a relationship between police and the public to make everything copacetic. i can tell you, people are raised to hate police, regardless of what kind of equipment they use. when you say you are trying to build a relationship, it is fake. in my own work ideal with different cultures and different races, you see that things are learned. regardless of how much you try to build a relationship, it is predetermined by it is taught at

the home to hate the police. i've seen it. guest: oddly enough, there is a tiny seed of truth in what he was saying. you teach people how to treat you. when police officers go through communities and treat the members of those communities as if they are enemy combatants, then the members of the community are going to respond and treat police officers as if they are their enemy. that is the reason that police having military equipment undermines trust and creates feelings between police officers and those they serve. it is not something taught at home, it is something that police are helping to teach and perpetuate. it is not new. if you go back to 1964, all the things that were happening between police and the public.

-- if you are going back to the 1960's, for example all the , things that were happening between police and the public. baldwin -- the writer james baldwin described police officers walking through harlem like occupying soldiers in an occupied country. this has been going on for a very long time. it is the responsibility of the government, be it a republican administration, i was a bush hire in the justice department. the job of the president is to promote democracy. under the constitution, we are responsible for establishing justice. any administration that fails to establish justice should be called out about it. because they are failing to do the job of the constitution. host: robert is on the independent line from new york. caller: first of all, i think it is very strange that you are talking about justice.

once you start bringing in military equipment to the police force, don't you follow that up with a militaristic tactic of the police force, followed up by u.n. police force, and the days of officer friendly are gone. i think the last eight years of gotten out of hand. guest: i think it took much longer than eight years to get out of hand. that is something that all members of the federal government have been trying to improve. dod sought to make improvements, the department of justice sought to make improvements to its jagged program and its asset forfeiture program. the federal government was doing its job. this executive order suggests to members of the federal government, the career individuals who have been working hard, that their work should stop, that their work is not important.

that is the wrong message to send. host: myesha braden, the acting director of the criminal justice project at lawyers' committee for civil rights under law, thank you for joining us. >> a live picture from the white house briefing room, where you can see reporters of gathered, waiting to hear from spokesman sarah huckabee sanders. this was supposed to start at about 3 p.m. eastern this afternoon. we understand it was intentionally delayed until texas governor greg abbott wrapped up his update to reporters on recovery efforts. that has just wrapped up. live coverage on c-span when it does get underway.